Impact of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on JW policies and procedures

Tho I don't agree with most views here I told the elders in my hall 10 years ago that we need an updated policy on child abuse. They looked at me like I was from a different planet. Fast forward till now and my words have a strong ring of truth.

Brokeback WT - "I'm thinking jail time for some of these guys once the legal court system gets going on these guys obstruction of justice, aiding criminal activity, recklessly putting minors at risk, and more. I think what the RC uncovered will be used for legal action against them in the US court system and may even wind getting the GB some jail time eventually over their undeniable authority they have making policies that can not be disobeyed by any branch even if in direct violation with the law of the land. The evidence is mounting against them in the public arena of life and their badness is finally coming prosecutable due to their extreme arrogance."

At this point, I can't help but wonder (since, from the WT's POV, they simply cannot capitulate) if they've concluded the same thing, and are now, at this point, trying to martyr themselves in an effort to "fulfill prophecy", hoping Jah will bail kickstart the Apocalypse and bail them all out.

steve2: Main point is jw organization has shown a preparedness to "adjust"
policies in a vain effort to make them less disagreeable. In one form or
another, jw organization is aware of what a dreadful PR exercise the
Royal Commission has become.

You couldn't be more wrong. They haven't (in their opinion) done anything wrong and aren't planning to change anything.

1009, I do not disagree with you. And I am well aware of jw organization's response to the Royal Commission's findings (to date).

From a PR perspective, they would be fools to overtly state, "We were wrong and are now going to modify our child sex abuse policies and procedures". This is legal warfare with potential heavy costs if they did so.

That said, the evidence shows that, little by little, over the years they have made subtle changes (sometimes without drawing attention to those changes) in their policies. For example, complainants do not have to confront their alleged perpetrator. And the strictly literal interpetation of the two-witness rule can now be applied to two witnesses reporting about different incidents.

Do I think those changes are an indication the organization thinks it has done anything wrong? NO.

Do I think those changes are an indication the organization has felt the heat over their child sex abuse policies and procedures and wants to come across as noble? Yes.

All else from jw organization is PR crap. So you and I are in agreement.